If it’s good for business then do it right? In an interesting twist, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and Nobel Prize winner Al Gore are urging chief executives to push politicians to agree to an ambitious global deal to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and combat climate change. Their contention? That its going to be in their companies' best interests.

"With your support and through your example we must harness the necessary political will to seal the deal in December," Ban told participants at the World Business Summit on Climate Change, which included hundreds of business executives as well as Queen Margrethe II of Denmark. "A strong message from the business community to governments worldwide may make all the difference."

Copenhagen will host negotiations in December aimed at forging a new U.N.-backed climate treaty to replace the Kyoto Protocol. The World Business Summit will issue a two-page recommendation on Tuesday which will be presented to the Danish government to take to the December talks.

Gore said, "We have a very short window of opportunity. If we want to limit temperature increase to about 2 degrees Celsius, then emissions globally must peak by 2015."

Ban said some companies have understood the challenge and have sought to turn it into a business opportunity, but he sharply criticized other companies that have not yet committed to dealing with climate change.

"Too many are sitting on the fence, waiting for others to act or waiting for the clear policies that will signal a level playing field," he said. "For those who are directly or implicitly lobbying against climate action, I have a clear message: Your ideas are out of date, and you are running out of time.

"Sooner or later there will be a higher price on carbon, imposed either by policy or by market forces. Any multinational business that doesn't have a strategy in place to deal with climate change will end up on the losing side of history."

Yesterday, European Commission President José Manuel Barroso told the conference a climate deal would bring big economic opportunities, with investments in green technologies estimated to produce a million new jobs in E.U. countries alone.

This approach may be just the thing we need to turn the tables and get the deal done. I applaud Gore and U.N. Secretary General Ban for their efforts in discussing an element of the issue that few focus on: the business opportunity. Throughout the history of U.S. industry, it has been these methods that have worked best – talking more about the positive changes and less about the cost to business. The benefits will far outweigh any investment. All the visionaries and those who know the issue can see that. And we’ll have a viable mother earth as well.

As of today, Democratic leaders do not have enough votes to move the Waxman-Markey legislation forward. They were hoping for a House subcommittee markup this week on the energy and global warming bill.

This bill would establish a cap-and-trade system to curb greenhouse gases and also promote development of renewable energy production.  Reps. Henry Waxman and Ed Markey, the committee's Democratic leaders, said they will complete their work on the legislation before the Memorial Day recess. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid was recently asked what his biggest concern is between now and the 2010 elections. He said, "Global warming. ... Health care is easier than this global warming stuff." Almost all Republicans are not in favor of the cap-and-trade bill.

Back in the House, about a dozen moderate Democrats are still questioning the size and scope of a 648-page draft of the Waxman-Markey legislation. Rep. Gene Green (D-Texas) told reporters earlier this week that he wanted Democratic committee leaders to schedule another hearing on the bill once they fill in a blank section from the draft that explains how to distribute emission credits among industries.

Rep. Charles Gonzales (D-Texas), another swing-vote lawmaker on the subcommittee, credited Waxman and Markey for not pressing forward on a subcommittee vote before the time is right.

"I think the chairman just has to work on something that has a chance of passing," Gonzales said. "I don't think you can afford a false start. You have to have some measure of success here, and I think a lot of us are willing to move in that direction, recognizing the need of the legislation. But there has to be some movement."

Another delay would not upset the Environmental Defense Fund. "It's more important to have a very strong, acceptable agreement," said Tony Kreindler, the group's spokesman.